ENIC...

rossdapep · Jan 5, 2023

fishhhandaricecake said:
ENIC are fine we just need Levy completely 1,000% away from the football side of the business and install a chairman who wants to push the boat out and win things and who gets the right people internally to set us up to play good football and to be successful in all football areas : academy, player recruitment ins and outs, manager hires, scouting network etc etc.

That's fair, I think.

If Levy and ENIC just set the budget for the window and let FP and go just get I with it, that's fine.

The club I work for, the fans know the sporting director is in control of ALL football matters. He has a budgets the team agree where its spent, the scouts present the coaches with players and the only time they go to the president is if a player is quite expensive. Otherwise the president and CEO have no real input.

So if the fans are angry at the club, they vent that at the Sporting Director. Thats when the president will step in to see what is going wrong and will only change the Sporting Director. That's all.

That's how we should operate. And if FP is seen to be doing a bad job, whether it's bad hires or poor recruitment, it's his neck on the line.

ReadieSpur · Jan 5, 2023

KaribYid said:
I'm not calling for ENIC to go but people need to stop with this poor argument.

There are thousands of billionaires (and companies/consortiums) who can buy a football club.

They aren't known quantities in the way that players and managers are. Did you know of Daniel Levy and ENIC before they bought us? Boehly and Clearlake before they bought Chelsea?

Most football fans can't suggest owners as until a club is up for sale you don't really have a clue who is possibly interested.

It wasn't an argument, it was a question. As you say, we haven't a clue who's interested, or who we'd end up with. I think people just assume we'll end up with an owner that spends, which isn't necessarily the case.

McArchibald · Jan 5, 2023

ReadieSpur said:
It wasn't an argument, it was a question. As you say, we haven't a clue who's interested, or who we'd end up with. I think people just assume we'll end up with an owner that spends, which isn't necessarily the case.

That is an extremely unlikely scenario. If someone would part with 1,5 - 2 billion to acquire us, they'd do so to push the club forward and thereby increase the value of their investment. In our case, the only way to do that would be for the club to become elite on the pitch as well as off it, and the only way to do that is to spend money on the squad, the youth setup and the scouting apparatus...

ultimateloner · Jan 5, 2023

Reading some of the recent posts just gives me relief that DL is running this club and not fans.

If fans are allowed to get their way this club wont survive long.

For example a point I've seen several times that goes along the lines of 'we should have invested when the team was strong and we could have won something' (i.e: the Poch years) has no consideration of the following:

1) Availability of players
2) Contract situation of the players (length)
3) how 'heated' is the market

And those are just the 'common sense' points from a non-professional.

People need to remember that the club only benefits if the right players are recruited at a good price.
The team may benefit from buying a proven player at an inflated price, but the club suffers in the long run. The commercial viability of the club takes precedence over onfield performance.

Bluto Blutarsky · Jan 5, 2023

ultimateloner said:
Reading some of the recent posts just gives me relief that DL is running this club and not fans.

If fans are allowed to get their way this club wont survive long.

For example a point I've seen several times that goes along the lines of 'we should have invested when the team was strong and we could have won something' (i.e: the Poch years) has no consideration of the following:

1) Availability of players
2) Contract situation of the players (length)
3) how 'heated' is the market

And those are just the 'common sense' points from a non-professional.

People need to remember that the club only benefits if the right players are recruited at a good price.
The team may benefit from buying a proven player at an inflated price, but the club suffers in the long run. The commercial viability of the club takes precedence over onfield performance.

You, sir, have obviously never played Football Manager.

fishhhandaricecake · Jan 5, 2023

ultimateloner said:
Reading some of the recent posts just gives me relief that DL is running this club and not fans.

If fans are allowed to get their way this club wont survive long.

For example a point I've seen several times that goes along the lines of 'we should have invested when the team was strong and we could have won something' (i.e: the Poch years) has no consideration of the following:

1) Availability of players
2) Contract situation of the players (length)
3) how 'heated' is the market

And those are just the 'common sense' points from a non-professional.

People need to remember that the club only benefits if the right players are recruited at a good price.
The team may benefit from buying a proven player at an inflated price, but the club suffers in the long run. The commercial viability of the club takes precedence over onfield performance.

Daniel is that you? ?

agrdavidsfan · Jan 5, 2023

What happened to the naming rights or influx of cash everyone went on about in the summer

ardiles&villa · Jan 6, 2023

ultimateloner said:
Reading some of the recent posts just gives me relief that DL is running this club and not fans.

If fans are allowed to get their way this club wont survive long.

For example a point I've seen several times that goes along the lines of 'we should have invested when the team was strong and we could have won something' (i.e: the Poch years) has no consideration of the following:

1) Availability of players
2) Contract situation of the players (length)
3) how 'heated' is the market

And those are just the 'common sense' points from a non-professional.

People need to remember that the club only benefits if the right players are recruited at a good price.
The team may benefit from buying a proven player at an inflated price, but the club suffers in the long run. The commercial viability of the club takes precedence over onfield performance.

Course it does, unless the commercial viability is artificially made and not as a result of success on the field as it should be.

we’re the 9th richest club in the world yet we haven’t won anything for 20 years and arguably anything important since the 1980s and yet we turn up to the transfer mwrrygo round with the budget and transfer strategy of a championship team who’s just been promoted.

SirHarryHotspur · Jan 6, 2023

ardiles&villa said:
yet we turn up to the transfer mwrrygo round with the budget and transfer strategy of a championship team who’s just been promoted.

All figures from transfermarket,
N'dombele £53 million, Richarlison £51 million Romero £44 million

Last four seasons outlay on incoming players £463 million , income from sale of players £132 million.

ultimateloner · Jan 6, 2023

ardiles&villa said:
Course it does, unless the commercial viability is artificially made and not as a result of success on the field as it should be.

we’re the 9th richest club in the world yet we haven’t won anything for 20 years and arguably anything important since the 1980s and yet we turn up to the transfer mwrrygo round with the budget and transfer strategy of a championship team who’s just been promoted.

Commercial viability is revenue and cost management. The on-field stuff is one aspect of it and not all.

We are the 9th richest club but there's only 1 PL/CL winner/year. Many other teams are in a better position than us to get those, so I don't see why you expect something to have been won over the last 20 years.

Leceister got lucky and won the PL. They've improved as a club by a bit and the team is now in all sorts of trouble. This shows you that winning a big thing once in a blue moon doesn't do enough good. You need to be consistently competing, and live in hope. Spending beyond your means doesn't help that.

The odds are stacked against a club like ours because we can't buy our way of of any trouble, the way Man Utd can. Therefore we can't make missteps in the first place, which we did (for example Ndom).

I feel it is unfair what you said about our transfer spending. Just looking at our last window: Richy, Perisic etc are all proven players and not ones that Championship clubs (or even mid-table ones) can afford.

Fans forget the duds too soon. Emerson Royal, GLC, Ndom; all costly mistakes. You can't just ignore those and expect the club to continue to spend. We need to recoup/absorb/manage these losses first before we move on.

TimNiceButDim · Jan 6, 2023

SirHarryHotspur said:
All figures from transfermarket,
N'dombele £53 million, Richarlison £51 million Romero £44 million

Last four seasons outlay on incoming players £463 million , income from sale of players £132 million.

I think peoples issues are less to do with the total amount spent but more what it’s spent on and when they actually spend it.

We’ve been within a whisker several times and have taken the cheap/nothing route.
Granted, since Paratici’s arrival things seemed to have perked up but it was grim reading before.

Even the figures you've highlighted are fairly low when compared to our rivals 'most expensive' signings, and that's what we're competing against.

JUSTINSIGNAL · Jan 6, 2023

ultimateloner said:
Commercial viability is revenue and cost management. The on-field stuff is one aspect of it and not all.

We are the 9th richest club but there's only 1 PL/CL winner/year. Many other teams are in a better position than us to get those, so I don't see why you expect something to have been won over the last 20 years.

Leceister got lucky and won the PL. They've improved as a club by a bit and the team is now in all sorts of trouble. This shows you that winning a big thing once in a blue moon doesn't do enough good. You need to be consistently competing, and live in hope. Spending beyond your means doesn't help that.

The odds are stacked against a club like ours because we can't buy our way of of any trouble, the way Man Utd can. Therefore we can't make missteps in the first place, which we did (for example Ndom).

I feel it is unfair what you said about our transfer spending. Just looking at our last window: Richy, Perisic etc are all proven players and not ones that Championship clubs (or even mid-table ones) can afford.

Fans forget the duds too soon. Emerson Royal, GLC, Ndom; all costly mistakes. You can't just ignore those and expect the club to continue to spend. We need to recoup/absorb/manage these losses first before we move on.

Good post.

Stuart Leathercock · Jan 6, 2023

ultimateloner said:
Commercial viability is revenue and cost management. The on-field stuff is one aspect of it and not all.

We are the 9th richest club but there's only 1 PL/CL winner/year. Many other teams are in a better position than us to get those, so I don't see why you expect something to have been won over the last 20 years.

Leceister got lucky and won the PL. They've improved as a club by a bit and the team is now in all sorts of trouble. This shows you that winning a big thing once in a blue moon doesn't do enough good. You need to be consistently competing, and live in hope. Spending beyond your means doesn't help that.

The odds are stacked against a club like ours because we can't buy our way of of any trouble, the way Man Utd can. Therefore we can't make missteps in the first place, which we did (for example Ndom).

I feel it is unfair what you said about our transfer spending. Just looking at our last window: Richy, Perisic etc are all proven players and not ones that Championship clubs (or even mid-table ones) can afford.

Fans forget the duds too soon. Emerson Royal, GLC, Ndom; all costly mistakes. You can't just ignore those and expect the club to continue to spend. We need to recoup/absorb/manage these losses first before we move on.

Everyone who talks about the monumental failure that Ndombele has been forgets that the manager who actually wanted him and signed him was sacked before he had a chance to properly accommodate that player he wanted (as well as the two other players he finally got) in the team.

When a club lurches from a manager with a specific style of play to a manager with a completely different style of play it is likely several players will be a bad fit.

If, as a CEO, you finally decide to give a consistently over-performing manager relative to funds provided decent money to spend after years of paucity, then firstly you shouldn't sack that manager so soon after finally giving him some decent money for new players and if you really do feel that you must sack that manager, then you absolutely shouldn't go out and get a manager with a completely different football philosophy.

ultimateloner · Jan 6, 2023

TimNiceButDim said:
I think peoples issues are less to do with the total amount spent but more what it’s spent on and when they actually spend it.

We’ve been within a whisker several times and have taken the cheap/nothing route.
Granted, since Paratici’s arrival things seemed to have perked up but it was grim reading before.

Even the figures you've highlighted are fairly low when compared to our rivals 'most expensive' signings, and that's what we're competing against.

What if 'when we were a few whiskers away' and wanted reinforcesments everyone jacks up the price by 30% because they know what we wanted? Is it still prudent to 'go for it' under those circumstances? What if it doesn't work out and the new guy you bought gets injured in his first game and misses the rest of the season?

It's natural to lament missed chances but perspective is needed. We are not talking about spare change here..we are talking about big numbers that would take years to undo.

We are competing against better resourced clubs. Our fans have set sight on the same thing as those clubs, which doesn;t make sense in the first place. We (as fans) shouldn't be measuring the club against Arsenal for example, because they are ahead of us on the curve. Its like if your kid is dyslexic and underperforms in a normal class would you put it against him? He shouldnt be in that class in the first place.

chrisd2k · Jan 6, 2023

Acceptance stage kicking in

ultimateloner · Jan 6, 2023

Stuart Leathercock said:
Everyone who talks about the monumental failure that Ndombele has been forgets that the manager who actually wanted him and signed him was sacked before he had a chance to properly accommodate that player he wanted (as well as the two other players he finally got) in the team.

When a club lurches from a manager with a specific style of play to a manager with a completely different style of play it is likely several players will be a bad fit.

If, as a CEO, you finally decide to give a consistently over-performing manager relative to funds provided decent money to spend after years of paucity, then firstly you shouldn't sack that manager so soon after finally giving him some decent money for new players and if you really do feel that you must sack that manager, then you absolutely shouldn't go out and get a manager with a completely different football philosophy.

I fundementally disagree about 'buying players for a particular manager'. For me, recruitment and manager/head coach are seperate things.

The manager/coach's job is to get the optimal result with the sqaud at his disposal. He can chip in with his views on the players, but that is all. No one should be bought to accomodate a managers play-style; it should be the other way around. In life generally you change yourself to pursue a result; i dont see why this should differ for a manager.

That is why I don't buy the 'Ndom was bought for Poch and Poch got sacked thats why it didn't work out' line. Ndom has had alot of chances with various managers and nothing worked. We signed the wrong player and paid a price for it, that is all.

fishhhandaricecake · Jan 6, 2023

ultimateloner said:
Commercial viability is revenue and cost management. The on-field stuff is one aspect of it and not all.

We are the 9th richest club but there's only 1 PL/CL winner/year. Many other teams are in a better position than us to get those, so I don't see why you expect something to have been won over the last 20 years.

Leceister got lucky and won the PL. They've improved as a club by a bit and the team is now in all sorts of trouble. This shows you that winning a big thing once in a blue moon doesn't do enough good. You need to be consistently competing, and live in hope. Spending beyond your means doesn't help that.

The odds are stacked against a club like ours because we can't buy our way of of any trouble, the way Man Utd can. Therefore we can't make missteps in the first place, which we did (for example Ndom).

I feel it is unfair what you said about our transfer spending. Just looking at our last window: Richy, Perisic etc are all proven players and not ones that Championship clubs (or even mid-table ones) can afford.

Fans forget the duds too soon. Emerson Royal, GLC, Ndom; all costly mistakes. You can't just ignore those and expect the club to continue to spend. We need to recoup/absorb/manage these losses first before we move on.

We’ve had opportunities to kick on a win trophies under ENIC but missed opportunities and mistakes on the football side all lead back to one little bald headed ?‍? man who thinks he knows best.

dontcallme · Jan 6, 2023

ultimateloner said:
Reading some of the recent posts just gives me relief that DL is running this club and not fans.

If fans are allowed to get their way this club wont survive long.

For example a point I've seen several times that goes along the lines of 'we should have invested when the team was strong and we could have won something' (i.e: the Poch years) has no consideration of the following:

1) Availability of players
2) Contract situation of the players (length)
3) how 'heated' is the market

And those are just the 'common sense' points from a non-professional.

People need to remember that the club only benefits if the right players are recruited at a good price.
The team may benefit from buying a proven player at an inflated price, but the club suffers in the long run. The commercial viability of the club takes precedence over onfield performance.

I've defended ENIC more than most. The points you make aren't completely invalid.

However, there are big questions that have to be asked.

What happened to the naming rights of the stadium? For a while it seemed that due to the pandemic we might have struggled to get the best possible deal. Now it just seems like incompetence and not getting a very easy investment of money.

How has Levy struggled so much to hire the right people to run the football side and then provide them with a setup to thrive? Since Poch we've gone from Jose to Nuno to Conte and the same criticisms about the running of the club persist.

Our net spend and wages have been at a decent level since Conte has taken over. But does anyone really think we're pushing the boat out and genuinely trying to get to the top?

Recent stories suggest Levy and board members are still sticking their fingers into parts of running the football side of things. It seems clear to me that Levy is a control freak and someone needs to get him to simply take a back stage role.

What happened to our £150m loan or whatever it was? Again, I never expected the full amount to go onto the 1st team but our level of investment is decent, not the level required from a team who vastly underspent for a long period.

The most important question for me is, do you think ENIC is really trying to make us a successful football team? I honestly don't. As long as we're doing OK and money is coming in, I think they're happy. The result is stagnation and a stale football club.

ultimateloner · Jan 6, 2023

fishhhandaricecake said:
We’ve had opportunities to kick on a win trophies under ENIC but missed opportunities and mistakes on the football side all lead back to one little bald headed ?‍? man who thinks he knows best.

Everyone gets opportunities when you stick around. We dont see the circumstancs surrounding those opportunities so its hard to put it against the club when we dont take them (i've already mentioned a couple of possible scenarios; e.g. other clubs jacking up the price).

I'm not sue if that little bald head knows best; but he certainly knows alot. The new stadium is better than any CL/PL title he could have won for us. Case in point is Leicester.

dontcallme · Jan 6, 2023

ultimateloner said:
I fundementally disagree about 'buying players for a particular manager'. For me, recruitment and manager/head coach are seperate things.

The manager/coach's job is to get the optimal result with the sqaud at his disposal. He can chip in with his views on the players, but that is all. No one should be bought to accomodate a managers play-style; it should be the other way around. In life generally you change yourself to pursue a result; i dont see why this should differ for a manager.

That is why I don't buy the 'Ndom was bought for Poch and Poch got sacked thats why it didn't work out' line. Ndom has had alot of chances with various managers and nothing worked. We signed the wrong player and paid a price for it, that is all.

I think that works if we hire managers that fit the squad. Pep couldn't manage a physical side with no technical ability, just like Allardyce would struggle with a technical side, lacking physicality.

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

ENIC...

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Ledley's Knee!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

SC Supporter

Well-Known Member

SC Supporter

Similar threads